500 words a day on whatever I want

Doomsday Clock

The Doomsday Clock (1947- ) marks how close the world is to self-destruction in the judgement of the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, with input from 15 Nobel Prize laureates. It uses:

“the imagery of apocalypse (midnight) and the contemporary idiom of nuclear explosion (countdown to zero) to convey threats to humanity and the planet.”

In 2017 it now stands at two and a half minutes to midnight, the worst it has been since the 1950s.

The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientistswas founded by scientists who created the first atom bomb. The founding editor was concerned not just with an atomic end of days but more generally with the “Pandora’s box of modern science”.

They set the clock according to not just the in/action of political leaders but stuff like the number and kind of nuclear weapons in use, how much carbon dioxide is in the air, the acidity of the oceans and how fast the sea level is rising.

The clock through the years, showing some of the highlights:

1947: It is 7 minutes to midnight when the clock first appears.

1949: 3 minutes: The Soviet Union gets the bomb.

1953: 2 minutes: US tests the first hydrogen bomb.

1963: 12 minutes: Partial Test Ban treaty, signed in the wake of the Cuban Missile Crisis.

Of 2017: A week after Trump became US president, they moved the clock a half minute closer to midnight:

“events surrounding the US presidential campaign – including cyber offensives and deception campaigns apparently directed by the Russian government and aimed at disrupting the US election – have brought American democracy and Russian intentions into question and thereby made the world more dangerous than was the case a year ago.”

Of Trump:

“He has shown a troubling propensity to discount or outright reject expert advice related to international security, including the conclusions of intelligence experts. And his nominees to head the Energy Department and the Environmental Protection Agency dispute the basics of climate science.”

North Korea is also a concern.

The way forward is to cut nuclear arms and carbon emissions, which in turn will decrease global warming and the likelihood of nuclear war. In 2016, carbon emissions were flat, while the number of nuclear weapons increased.

A good first step for the US:

“the Trump administration needs to make a clear, unequivocal statement that it accepts climate change, caused by human activity, as a scientific reality. No problem can be solved, unless its existence is recognized.”

What ordinary citizens can do:

Learn about climate change and nuclear weapons.

Share what they learn.

Inform government representatives of their concerns.

The Bulletin:

“Facts are indeed stubborn things, and they must be taken into account if the future of humanity is to be preserved, long term.”

– Abagond, 2017.

Update (January 26th 2018): The clock has moved forward 30 seconds to two minutes before midnight, the worst it has been since 1953. BBC.

155 Responses

In his first call as president with Russian leader Vladimir Putin, Donald Trump denounced a treaty that caps U.S. and Russian deployment of nuclear warheads as a bad deal for the United States, according to two U.S. officials and one former U.S. official with knowledge of the call.

When Putin raised the possibility of extending the 2010 treaty, known as New START, Trump paused to ask his aides in an aside what the treaty was, these sources said.

Trump then told Putin the treaty was one of several bad deals negotiated by the Obama administration, saying that New START favored Russia….

New START gives both countries until February 2018 to reduce their deployed strategic nuclear warheads to no more than 1,550, the lowest level in decades. It also limits deployed land- and submarine-based missiles and nuclear-capable bombers.

During a debate in the 2016 presidential election, Trump said Russia had “outsmarted” the United States with the treaty, which he called “START-Up.” He asserted incorrectly then that it had allowed Russia to continue to produce nuclear warheads while the United States could not….

In the phone call, the Russian leader raised the possibility of reviving talks on a range of disputes and suggested extending New START, the sources said.

New START can be extended for another five years, beyond 2021, by mutual agreement. Unless they agree to do that or negotiate new cuts, the world’s two biggest nuclear powers would be freed from the treaty’s limits, potentially setting the stage for a new arms race.

“events surrounding the US presidential campaign – including cyber offensives and deception campaigns apparently directed by the Russian government and aimed at disrupting the US election – have brought American democracy and Russian intentions into question and thereby made the world more dangerous than was the case a year ago.”
Keep repeating this myth often enough and it becomes fact. There is no evidence that Russia hacked US election. The nation that has moved us closer to Doomsday is the US under the leadership of Barack Obama. Trump has had the opposite effect with regard to Russia, resisting the Obama/Hillary agenda of pushing for war with that country, though he has on the other hand been belligerent towards Iran and China. That too can lead to nuclear war but not as certainly as a military clash with Russia. When Hillary lost the election the Doomsday clock should actually moved back a minute. She was more prone to war with Russia than Trump.

no mention of shift in US leadership opinion from MAD to a belief that war with Russia is winnable nor of expelling Russian diplomats and sending NATO troops to Russia border in December 2016 under Obama as having any effect on the Doomsday clock.

Ha! You got jokes.. But you forgot to mention that you better bring a big bag of cash with you while INFORMING those representatives of your concerns because THAT’S HOW Amerika’s system works. Money talks.

Concerns? lol Not so much! In one ear (if you’re lucky enough to get an audience) then out the other ear.
Cash gets stuff done in a lobbyist fed system.

At least Putin cares something about the Russian people should a doomsday scenario occur. They have prepared underground cities/bunkers for ordinary Russian people (not just for the elites) to avoid complete death and annihilation. Russia may or may not win a nuclear exchange, but they have insured that at least a good amount of their people will survive a holocaust!

Can the same be said of the Amerikan (Democrat/Republican) leadership?

There are those who are still (insert Bulletin of Atomic Scientists) attempting to make God out to be a liar (1 John 5:10); that a nuclear war will not take place (Zechariah 14:12) and therefore, averted by mortal men; that the so-called elitarians amongst us aren’t prepared to temporarily escape to their Deep Underground Military Bases (DUMBs, Cheyenne Mountains) at the initial stages of Armageddon (Revelation 6:15).

They’ll be safe for a little while. But after the nuclear dust settles, they better brace themselves because the hunters will be tearing the doors down. Personally, I hope and pray to God that I’m selected as one of His 144,000 hunters to exact terror on the elites that will survive. (Revelation 7:4)

It is unquestionable that a large sum of humanity will die, but not all of us, due to radiation exposure. Those who believe in Him will live and those who think otherwise will die (John 11:26). The Most High will put the warrior Spirit on his hunters and send them to every mountain (bunkers) in order to finish off the so-called elites who have wreak havoc on this planet (Jeremiah 16:16) in an attempt to supplant themselves as being G-d.

To me, it’s truly comical that mortal men (Atomic Scientists) with their diminutive level of wisdom would even attempt to prevent something from happening that’s already been prophesied to happen and WRITTEN by the Most High true God! (Wisdom of Solomon 17:7-8)

All of the Lord’s prophecies will come to pass and not even one of them will fail! (Isaiah 34:16)

Revelation 6:15 And the kings of the earth, and the great men, and the rich men, and the chief captains, and the mighty men, and every bondman, and every free man, hid themselves in the dens and in the rocks of the mountains;

2 Esdras 16 Like as an arrow (missiles) which is shot of a mighty archer returneth not backward: even so the plagues that shall be sent upon earth shall not return again.

John 11:26 And whosoever liveth and believeth in me shall never die. Believest thou this?

Jeremiah 16:16 Behold, I will send for many fishers, saith the LORD, and they shall fish them; and after will I send for many hunters, and they shall hunt them from every mountain, and from every hill, and out of the holes of the rocks.

Zechariah 14:12 And this shall be the plague wherewith the LORD will smite all the people that have fought against Jerusalem; Their flesh shall consume away while they stand upon their feet, and their eyes shall consume away in their holes, and their tongue shall consume away in their mouth.

Wisdom of Solomon 17:7-8 As for the illusions of art magick, they were put down, and their vaunting in wisdom was reproved with disgrace. 8 For they, that promised to drive away terrors and troubles from a sick soul, were sick themselves of fear, worthy to be laughed at. (the Bilderberg Group; the Illuminati and the Atomic Scientists)

Revelation 7:4 And I heard the number of them which were sealed: and there were sealed an hundred and forty and four thousand of all the tribes of the children of Israel.

2 Peter 3:10-15 But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up.

Isaiah 34:16 Seek ye out of the book of the LORD, and read: no one of these shall fail,

Did I say ‘sending NATO troops to Russia border in December 2016 under Obama’?
It was US troops. That’s even more provocative. It’s a curious Doomsday clock that does not take into account US efforts to bring about conflict with Russia, Especially the US engineered Ukrainian coup.

Well, there you go. Both the Hillary road and the Trump road led to the same end, didn’t it. Potential war with Russia and inevitably WW III.
I didn’t think Trump would capitulate so soon, giving his campaign rhetoric about getting along with Russia. Obviously there has been some behind the scenes arm twisting going on, leveraging this manufactured Mike Flynn scandal.
The controllers of this nation, whoever they may be (the president is only a figurehead), the real Big Brother, want war with Russia. The ones that gave Barama his marching orders. They would have gone with the Hillary fork. They would have gone to war with Russia with no resistance. But Hillary lost so they went with the contingency plan of coercing Trump into following through on that agenda. Both forks in the road led to the same end.http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2017/02/trump-declares-war-russia.html

Here’s a conspiracy theory: Putin wanted Trump in as president to soften us up before launching a conventional war against us.

Here we are, less than a month after the inauguration, and the White House is almost paralyzed due to scandals, incompetency, and in-fighting. Trump’s already alienating key allies, hasn’t yet filled many ambassador positions around the globe, and looks to be gearing up for a witchhunt against his own intelligence community.

Trump has also said (think it was quoted on a different thread) that he wants to tear everything down so he can build it back up again. But what if after he tears it all down, Putin picks that moment to invade?

@Solitaire
I would call that Russophobia and Trump hysteria.
Russia has giving no indication of wanting war with the US.
The witch hunt is obviously the Intelligence Community’s against Trump. The stuff yall smoking is dangerously absurd and an inversion of reality.

BTW, in the comment you were responding to, I did not mention the Deep State. Doesn’t even sound like a term I have used. But I’m not adverse to using it.

I said “The controllers of this nation, whoever they may be (the president is only a figurehead), the real Big Brother”

We could call these controllers the Deep State. Or perhaps the Deep State is their means of control. We know there are people working behind the scenes to set the agenda. There are names of people of considerable political influence thrown about. Soros, Rockefeller, Kissinger. Maybe bankers are a part of the Deep State cabal that controls presidents. We know for example that a banker chose Obama’s cabinet. And since much of what our government does is secret, the Intel community plays a large roll, along with the driving engine of the Deep State, the MIC. Who knows who these controllers are?

“I would call that Russophobia and Trump hysteria…. The stuff yall smoking is dangerously absurd and an inversion of reality.”

Except that I don’t believe it, any more than I believe Hillary Clinton wanted a nuclear war with Russia.

All I’m saying is if you fit certain pieces of a puzzle together in a certain way, you could equally argue that Putin wants a war with us as long as he can have it under his terms with a good chance of winning. That doesn’t mean I believe it to be true — I’m just saying.

It is probably more likely that Putin wants to see the US weakened and destabilized economically and militarily but has no intention of attacking. And even here, I’m not saying that he definitely wants a weakened America or that I thoroughly believe he does. I think it’s a possibility; it would make strategic sense. But it is equally likely not to be true.

“The witch hunt is obviously the Intelligence Community’s against Trump.”

Trump is currently planning to investigate the intelligence community and root out those he doesn’t like.

“Who knows who these controllers are?”

So in your opinion, is the US government the only one being controlled by secret players behind the scene? Or does this apply also to England, Canada, Germany, etc.? Is it possible that Putin is also being controlled?

@Solitaire
“All I’m saying is if you fit certain pieces of a puzzle together in a certain way, you could equally argue that Putin wants a war with us as long as he can have it under his terms with a good chance of winning. That doesn’t mean I believe it to be true — I’m just saying.”

If you disregard empirical evidence you could. Nate has been tightening the noose around Russia since the end of the Cold War. The US has surrounded Russia with military basis. The US has provoked an anti-Russian coup in Ukraine. Sent US troops to the Russian border and expelled Russian diplomats on the basis of allegations not yet supported by evidence. And the anti Russian hostility that issues from the mouths of our elected officials, which BTW contrasts markedly to the restrained rhetoric of Putin. All Russia is has done is defend itself from US aggression. Any objective observer can see who the war mongering state is here.
You’d have to deny reality to argue that Putin wants war.

And Putin’s response was to invade an independent, sovereign nation and annex part of its territory. He had other, less aggressive options open to him, but he chose not to take them.

Correct me if I’m wrong, but I get the impression you think if someone disapproves of Putin’s actions, they must approve of the US and NATO. I disagree. I believe they are all jockeying for power. I believe that all parties view their questionable actions as necessary for their self-defense. I believe this mindset puts the world in danger. The Cold War may have ended, but the old lines are still in place and the old mentality still holds sway. All parties share the blame.

You don’t have to answer this next question if you don’t want, but I’ll ask it a second time in case you missed it because I am interested in your opinion: Is Putin also a puppet of unseen masters, or is he his own man?

resw
I was just thinking about the Trump/O’Reilly factor, where O’Reilly called Putin a murderer. Of course any head of state that has ever caused the death of anyone can be accused rightly or wrongly of murder. But here he is speaking from a MSM platform, MSM complicit in the murder of tens of thousands, in a government that reserves the right to murder anyone anywhere in the world. If any leader there is who is specifically known for murder it is Barack Obama; the guy who claimed to be good at it and bragged about killing Osama bin Ladin. O’Reilly cries ‘Putin is a murderer!’ Why does this astound him? He has just had a president who famously personally chose persons to be assassinated by drone on a weekly basis. Did O’Reilly, at any time during this eight years call Obama a murderer? (Somebody knows the answer to that.) The Russophobic double standard is mind boggling.

“And Putin’s response was to invade an independent, sovereign nation and annex part of its territory. He had other, less aggressive options open to him, but he chose not to take them.”

He didn’t invade. He was invited by Crimea to defend them from Russia hating Nazis, which Obama supported. Imagine that. A black president supporting Nazis. I don’t think Putin’s other options, whatever they may have been, were feasible. Or beneficial to Russia. Why should he bow to US hegemony on his doorstep?
Bottom line. Russia would have taken no action in Crimea had it not been for the coup sponsored by and provoked by the USA. As I say. Russia is only reacting to US aggression.

” …O’Reilly called Putin a murderer…. But here he is speaking from a MSM platform, MSM complicit in the murder of tens of thousands, in a government that reserves the right to murder anyone anywhere in the world. ”

Right, if anyone’s a murderer it’s O’Reilly and the msm executives/faux journalists who conned Americans into supporting the Iraqi invasion based on completely false pretenses, leading to the deaths of at least 100,000.

“Did O’Reilly, at any time during this eight years call Obama a murderer? (Somebody knows the answer to that.)”

Abagond usually knows what happens on Fox News, so maybe he can answer that.

I suppose the implication is that The New York Times, Washington Post and NPR are doing their best to report the truth and the others, including RT, are purveyors of falsehoods. That, as regards RT, is a lie. More propaganda. More subtle Russophobia, but propaganda still. That’s not likely to restore MSM’s credibility, so ignominiously surrendered during the Hillary election debacle. The cynicism didn’t just arise out of nowhere. MSM brought it upon itself. This finger pointing is not going to help restore that credibility. I don’t really know if MSM is redeemable. I’m certainly getting my news from somewhere else and a lots more people besides me. These charlatans can F off for all I care.

“Sure it could be true, but without proof or without any predictive value, it is idle speculation.”
There is a large body of literature on this subject and various branches of it, as I indicated, from MIC to CIA to banksters and NGOs and groups like Bilderbergs, Skull and Bones and on and on.. To say it is not worth investigating is simply wrong. In fact it’s absurd. You will not be able to determine a ‘predictive value’ until you have examined the evidence. There is nothing idle about revealing the truth.

“without proof or without any predictive value, it is idle speculation.”

Proofs are available in the various literatures that I mentioned. Predictive value emerges from research in those areas. Investigating rather than dismissing as conspiracy theory, in all the pejorative sense of that label.

“I suppose the implication is that The New York Times, Washington Post and NPR are doing their best to report the truth and the others, including RT, are purveyors of falsehoods. That, as regards RT, is a lie. More propaganda. ”

If the New York Times is propaganda, then RT most certainly is. When has RT ever broken a scandal on Vladimir Putin? But to their credit they did denounce PizzaGate as fake news.

oh I stand corrected. but as I say I have no qualms about using the term.
on the merits of RT versus MSM, MSM is not even in the same league. it is much more propagandistic than RT. as I say MSMs job is to hide geopolitical realities from Americans. RT is the antidote to that mind control because they report what MSM won’t. I think that’s their motto.

When I use the term “the State” I am referring to the apparatus of the State and it’s monopoly on violence. “War is the health of the State”.

Most governments around the world have States structured like the example above. Citizens think that a State is like a car. If there political party or idiology comes to power they will be able to steer the State to do the good things that they belive in. So they participate in political theater not realizing that the State is the collective “id” of their culture (in the West, white supremacy) and functions instinctively to preserve that. The State works in partnership with banks, corperations, the rich ect. to protect, maintain and expand that wealth at the expense of the average citizen.

States continue to expand until they collapse. Then a new set of thugs take over. Rarely has revolution brought real political change. The Arab Spring is a good example of that.

@MJB
I just want to be sure I’m interpreting this correctly. What you seem to be talking about is the state, not the deep state. So, I ask you like I asked Abagond, Is there a deep state? With all the Intel originating attacks against Trump, the legitimately elected president, from P gate dossier to the Flynn assassination, are you really going to assert that there is no deep state? With an agenda in this case that contradicts the president’s?

People in debates like to change the terminology of the discussion to take control of it by getting their opponent to use their words. I’m just pointing out that that is what has happened here. I tend to guard against such shifts in terminology, just to be sure people aren’t distorting what I’m saying. Controllers was my term. At least for this thread. However, I have no objection to using the term you substituted. It doesn’t seem to alter the discussion any.

“So [citizens] participate in political theater not realizing that the State is the collective “id” of their culture (in the West, white supremacy) and functions instinctively to preserve that. The State works in partnership with banks, corperations, the rich ect. to protect, maintain and expand that wealth at the expense of the average citizen.

States continue to expand until they collapse. Then a new set of thugs take over. Rarely has revolution brought real political change.”

Well said. That is also my understanding of modern nation-states and real effects of most revolutions.

Greenwald asserted in an interview with Democracy Now, published on Thursday, that this [Flynn situation] boils down to a fight between the Deep State and the Trump administration.
According to an in-depth report by journalist Mike Lofgren:
“The Deep State does not consist of the entire government. It is a hybrid of national security and law enforcement agencies: the Department of Defense, the Department of State, the Department of Homeland Security, the Central Intelligence Agency and the Justice Department. I also include the Department of the Treasury because of its jurisdiction over financial flows, its enforcement of international sanctions and its organic symbiosis with Wall Street.”
As Greenwald explained during his interview:
“It’s agencies like the CIA, the NSA and the other intelligence agencies, that are essentially designed to disseminate disinformation and deceit and propaganda, and have a long history of doing not only that, but also have a long history of the world’s worst war crimes, atrocities and death squads.”http://sorendreier.com/chilling-warnings-about-deep-states-war-on-trump/

Trump versus the Deep State. What a quandary. Who to root for? The racist or the police state? It’s only fair. The elite have been pitting us left right people against each other for so long, it’s about time for the shoe to be on the other foot. The president against the Deep State. Let’s you and him fight.

Just read an excellent 2014 essay on the Deep State by Mike Lofgren. He describes the Deep State this way:

“It is the red thread that runs through the war on terrorism, the financialization and deindustrialization of the American economy, the rise of a plutocratic social structure and political dysfunction. Washington is the headquarters of the Deep State, and its time in the sun as a rival to Rome, Constantinople or London may be term-limited by its overweening sense of self-importance and its habit, as Winwood Reade said of Rome, to “live upon its principal till ruin stared it in the face.” “Living upon its principal,” in this case, means that the Deep State has been extracting value from the American people in vampire-like fashion.”

“the Deep State has been extracting value from the American people in vampire-like fashion.”
Sucking the blood of the sufferers. And like vampires doing evil under the cloak of darkness, taking possession of people’s minds and doing evil. Deep state might be the Babylon system.

Wait a second, deep state is as i described but wnd is saying ‘pro-obama’ ie [tacitly] democratic or maybe overtly even, calling it that but my gut is a ‘top tier’ military-industrial complex bubble or something, ‘presidential curiosity is not sufficient… Like making the regular govt the congress as opposed to the senate, and grooming the populace’s not only conscious nut experience vis a vis controlling news eh whatever

damn. i had a more thoughtful comment but lost it in trying to insert a link.
basically Obama is the last in the dynasty of CIA presidents and actually works for the CIA. you can tell by his policies that he wasn’t a real democrat. he was a DINO. he’s staying on to help the Deep State overthrow Trump. to orchestrate the coup actually.
Is an American Coup d’etat in Progress?
“Have you asked yourself the question of why Former President Obama is hunkering down in a secure fortress in DC to lead the new “Regime Change” against duly elected President Donald Trump? ”https://geopolitics.co/2017/02/20/is-an-american-coup-detat-in-progress/
It’s skewed right wing, but makes an important point.

oh yeah. I also said that the fact that Trump is in acrimony with the Deep State indicates that he is not a part of it, as has been every president at least since Reagan and possibly since Kennedy. And I also said, that’s a good thing.

“oh yeah. I also said that the fact that Trump is in acrimony with the Deep State indicates that he is not a part of it, as has been every president at least since Reagan and possibly since Kennedy. And I also said, that’s a good thing.”

By the same logic, Hillary Clinton was not part of the deep state either given the way Comey, the FBI director, broke with protocol and said he was still investigating her email scandal.

I don’t see the “deep state” the same way as has been described. I belive their is a corporatacracy that includes the media and is driven by corperations but I’m not convinced the “deep state” is as entrenched against Trump as Breitbart and the Alt Right describe it.

They see the deep state as interfering with Trump ect but what they really want is to control those institutions within government that deal with intelligence and enforcement. They wish to use the state as a mechanism to enact violence lawfully against their perceived enemies as well as against immigrants and non whites.

@abagond
“By the same logic, Hillary Clinton was not part of the deep state ”

Oh yeah. Like the Deep State would not throw one of their own under the bus when they become a liability and too carelessly crooked even for them. Hillary never challenged the Deep State, as Trump is doing. That would be a sign that she’s not a part of it. The fact that she was following the Obama agenda says that she was in alignment with the Deep State.
@MJB
“They see the deep state as interfering with Trump ” and so do I.

“If the New York Times is propaganda, then RT most certainly is. When has RT ever broken a scandal on Vladimir Putin? But to their credit they did denounce PizzaGate as fake news.”

That’s because they are creditable and have journalistic integrity sorely missing from MSM. Instead of smearing RT as propaganda you, as a commentator on black culture, should be praising them for their coverage of black issues. Today I watched a segment on Watching the Hawks “Remembering Malcolm X” featuring his daughter. When has MSM done such reporting?

Huh? RT has journalistic integrity? They are Putin’s little lapdog, just like Fox News is now Trump’s little lapdog. Neither speak truth to power within their own country. Both are political hacks.

RT, from what I have seen of it (mainly the headline news), seems to have a White nationalist / Clash-of-Civilizations theme. Its stories strangely track Fox News and Breitbart News. In fact, you first came off as a Fox News viewer to me. And some of what you say is echoed in Breitbart, like about the Deep State and the profound corruption of the Democratic Party.

RT seems to run stories about Blacks in the US for the same reason East German television did back in the 1980s: to make the US look bad. I doubt they do it out of any concern for Black people.

After all, what Black commentators and reporters does RT have? Every time I watch it, all I see is White people telling me the news. Why is that?

@abagond
“In fact, you first came off as a Fox News viewer to me. And some of what you say is echoed in Breitbart, like about the Deep State and the profound corruption of the Democratic Party.”
I guess great minds think alike
“RT seems to run stories about Blacks in the US for the same reason East German television did back in the 1980s: to make the US look bad. I doubt they do it out of any concern for Black people.”
tsk tsk. so cynical. and such a true believer In the uprightness of US. US dont need RT to make US look bad, too bad you’ll never see whats just outside the blinders you wear.

“After all, what Black commentators and reporters does RT have?”
as we know from Obama, black misleaders and news regurgitaters, black skin does not mean black friend.
“Every time I watch it, all I see is White people telling me the news. Why is that?”
I don’t know. I guess ’cause they’re white. you gon’ hold that against them?

“Huh? RT has journalistic integrity? They are Putin’s little lapdog, just like Fox News is now Trump’s little lapdog. Neither speak truth to power within their own country. Both are political hacks.”
You like to make these unfounded equivalencies. E.g. Because one is a hack, the other has got to be a hack. By definition, Russia’s has got to be worse than America’s. Whatever America’s guilty of, Russia is even more guilty. Face the fact. Our media are the propagandistic even criminal hacks, in that they lie us into wars that cause the lives of millions. They hide news. RT reveals it. US media is not in the same class with RT.

And you keep making these claims without backing them up. Show me the proof that RT is Putin’s lapdog.

“Oh yeah. Like the Deep State would not throw one of their own under the bus when they become a liability and too carelessly crooked even for them. Hillary never challenged the Deep State, as Trump is doing. That would be a sign that she’s not a part of it. The fact that she was following the Obama agenda says that she was in alignment with the Deep State.”

So then Trump is part of the Russian deep state, since he freely compares the CIA to Nazis and yet has never a bad word to say about Vladimir Putin and even ran on a strangely pro-Russian platform.

You’d think between abagond’s provincial Univision Communications and Breitbart news “diets”, he’d actually want to go on an RT “diet” so he can actually know what he’s talking about instead of spreading propaganda.

“So then Trump is part of the Russian deep state, since he freely compares the CIA to Nazis and yet has never a bad word to say about Vladimir Putin and even ran on a strangely pro-Russian platform.”
I’m sure you have name for this fallacious argument type. Where can I find it?

-never a bad word to say about Vladimir Putin
I don’t know if that’s true or not and if it is its a good thing, but only by wildly stretching the imagination does that make him a part of the deep state. please return to sanity, abagond. your credibility is taking a hit.

-ran on a strangely pro-Russian platform
this a lie and pure propaganda straight from the hoary womb of Hillary Clinton, midwifed by Barack Obama and delivered to the Deep State.

@abagond
The video. It doesn’t get any clearer than that. The scion of Zbigniew Brzezinski says that the job of the MSM is to control what people think. She inadvertently let the truth out the bag. MSM is propaganda. I didn’t need her to tell me that. I discovered it on my own. But perhaps you do, since nothing for you can be true unless it comes from the official news source. Well here it is. Delivered by MSM itself.

‘Well, Russia is too.’ I know. The all sides do it argument.

Well no. RT isn’t. These are reporters with journalistic integrity. Not like our sycophantic warmongering media.

“Face the fact. Our media are the propagandistic even criminal hacks, in that they lie us into wars that cause the lives of millions. They hide news. RT reveals it.”

“Like what? What great truths does RT reveal that are hidden by the US media?”

Off the top of my head that ISIS as prosecuted by Obama was a phony war.
The US provoked the coup in Ukraine. Americans believe Russia invaded. The rest of the world knows this is not true. already discussed above, numerous things, many of which I have posted to this blog.
Like what? What great truths does RT reveal that are hidden by the US media?

“RT is directly controlled by the Russian government.”
I’ve already refuted it. Resw has already debunked. And yet you’re going to make that statement as if it were a proven fact. Your credibility is crumbling.

Just to be clear, some parts of the MSM are clearly propagandistic, like Fox News and MSNBC, meaning that they are more interested in pushing a particular political message than in seeking the truth. RT is in the same class, from what I have seen. CNN, the BBC and the New York Times, on the other hand, do seem to make a serious attempt at getting their facts right. That hardly means they are always right or that they are without bias. All three, for example, have a clear pro-Israeli bias.

“What you and resw debunked and I was wrong about is that RT is OWNED by the government. It is not. I agree. But it still gets most of its money from the government.”
the government does not control its content, as you repeatedly assert,

you make it sound like putin issues talking points to Chris Hedges, Jesse Ventura, Larry King and the lesser known journalists and news people, every one of the journalists there that i observed were independent thinkers. every bit as abby whatshername that you have mentioned. no. no more than Obama issued talking points to cnn abc and cbs. which by the way still carried water for the his administration, well aware that they were the propaganda wing of the federal government.

“These wartime developments are not necessarily the work of a democratically elected government, but a shadowy cocktail hybrid of a number of different agencies who will oust anyone they view as a threat to their agenda.”

“Obama-Trump economic sanctions against Russia are based upon the lies that are to be exposed as lies, in the links here. So too are the NATO movements of U.S. troops and missiles right up to Russia’s very borders — ready to invade Russia — based especially upon the lie of ‘Russian aggression in Crimea’. All of the thrust for WW III is based upon U.S. President Barack Obama’s vicious lie against Russia: his saying that the transfer of Crimea from Ukraine to Russia was not (which it actually was) an example of the U.N.-and-U.S. universally recognized right of self-determination of peoples (such as the U.S. recognizes to apply both in Catalonia and in Scotland, but not in Crimea) but was instead an alleged ‘conquest’ of Crimea by Russia. (As that link there documents, Obama’s allegation that it was ‘Putin’s conquest’ of Crimea is false, and he knew it to be false; he was well informed that the people of Crimea overwhelmingly wanted their land to be restored to Russia, and to be protected by Russia, so as not to be invaded by the Ukrainian government’s troops and weapons, after a bloody U.S. coup by Obama had — less than a month earlier — overthrown the democratically elected President of Ukraine, for whom 75% of Crimeans had voted. Obama’s own agents were behind that coup; they were doing his bidding. The aggressor here is entirely the U.S., not Russia, despite Obama’s lies.)”http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2017/02/things-will-get-worse-u-s-stops-lying-crimea.html

“CNN, the BBC and the New York Times, on the other hand, do seem to make a serious attempt at getting their facts right.”

And that has nothing to do with whether or not something is propaganda. An article can be full of errors and not be propaganda, and one can contain mostly factual information and still be propaganda.

A perfect example is NYT’s article, “A Powerful Russian Weapon: The Spread of False Stories” which accurately says Swedish officials found no links to Russia, but still talks about Russia anyway, and even includes a photo of “unidentified soldiers” in Crimea, as if that has anything to do with fake news in Sweden.

And using abagond’s own standard regarding RT, BBC shouldn’t be trusted because it’s “controlled” by the UK government. And you need look no further than its coverage of Brexit, Syria and Israel to see that it too engages in propaganda.

It is a fact that BBC editor instructed staff to be pro-Israel and not blame Israel for its attacks in Gaza. It is a fact that he said ““Please remember, Israel doesn’t maintain a blockade around Gaza. Egypt controls the southern border.” Forget the fact that Israel with US help built a wall on that southern border, patrols it, and only allows one entrance between Gaza and Egypt.

And CNN? Don’t make us laugh. Its election coverage proved it has a clear agenda. But of course you’re going to defend the network that shilled for your boss, and I don’t blame you since you’re still collecting a cheque.

@An Scríbhneoir Gael-Mheiriceánach
No. Nobody nor nothing is controlling everything you do. Just your thoughts about geopolitical realities. To the degree that you passively accept the programming. And while somewhere along the line Bilderbergs and lizard people may play a roll, your outlook on the world is primarily being controlled by the CIA and MSM. That’s why you believe that Russia hacked the election, installed Trump, and invaded Ukraine. You believe what the state tells you to believe. Its 1984. How many fingers am I holding up?

“Greetings, Mr. President. Thank you for taking a few minutes to see me today. I understand your time is valuable, so let me get to the point: …

You need to pull a Mukden maneuver. A Tonkin trick. A Swedish stitch-up. A Gleiwitz gambit. A Lavon lark. A Moscow machination.

You know, a false flag.
…

I know most people would balk at the idea of telling such a brazen lie, but that’s what I like about you, sir. You’re not afraid to lie, and lie bigly. That’s what this country needs. And the way you got Sean Spicer to straight up lie to the public’s face and tell them that Iran has fired missiles on a US naval vessel was masterful. Who else could think of taking a Houthi rebel attack on a Saudi frigate and turning it into an Iranian attack on the US Navy? It’s so unbelievable, only the American public could buy it!

…

Now, Mr. President, among your many excellent choices of warmongers, banksters and establishment hacks for your cabinet, I have to especially congratulate you on the choice of Rudy “Butcher of New York” Giuliani on the position of cybersecurity advisor. It’s brilliant on every level. First of all, he has no education, training, experience or displayed interest in technology or cybersecurity, so he won’t get bogged down in actual issues. Secondly, he’s a legitimate 9/11 suspect! He helped illegally clear the 9/11 crime scene! He admitted to foreknowledge of the towers’ collapse! Who better to cover up the next false flag then the man who covered up the last one! It’s like poetry, it rhymes.

…I’m sorry, what’s that? Your opinion? Hahaha. You really are a character, Mr. President, I’ll give you that. Do you think you get an opinion on this? Do you think I’m here to solicit your suggestions? Oh, that’s rich, sir. No, I’m here to let you know some of the options we’re considering. So that, when the time comes, wherever you are, whatever you’re doing, even if you’re sitting in a classroom full of kids reading a story about a pet goat, you will know to sit quietly and await your further orders.

Yes — just like the U.S. invaded Mexico to take over territory. Regardless of how we sought to justify that (e.g., protecting Americans living in those regions), it was still an invasion.

Putin’s actions in your opinion may be justified, but it still constitutes an invasion. Crimea was legally part of Ukraine, a status recognized internationally and by the United Nations. Putin used military action to take Crimea away from Ukraine.

Ukraine (not just the region of Crimea) has a history of being subsumed by Russia and its independence movements repeatedly crushed.

Well, that would be people’s opinions, wouldn’t it? And I expect the opinions of “the Crimeans” would break largely across ethnic lines.

What’s really sad is the Crimean Tartars are the ethnic group who have the strongest and oldest claim to Crimea, but they have been virtually ignored in this controversy.

Stalin exiled the entire Crimean Tatar population and forcibly removed them from Crimea in 1944. It’s only been relatively recently that any Crimean Tartars have been allowed to return, but they now constitute an estimated 12% of the Crimean population.

After the annexation, the Russian government told the Crimean Tartars who live on the coast that they would be relocated to other parts of Crimea, whether they want to move or not.

So the people to whom the land belonged for hundreds of years have no voice in this argument between Russia and Ukraine, no autonomy, and not even enough power to prevent their forced removal from their coastal homes.

They’re also Muslim, and we can see from Chechnya what they probably have to look forward to.

So much dichotomous thinking in this thread. The U.S. is bad, so therefore Russia must be good. They can’t both be bad. And anyone who points out Russia’s faults must automatically think the U.S. is faultless — no matter what they say to the contrary. It’s all good/evil and no shades of gray allowed.

@Solitaire
“Well, that would be people’s opinions, wouldn’t it?”
They are the ones who would know. Did the Russians rape and pillage and firebomb while they were invading? Or did the population of Crimea petition Russia for annexation?

“The U.S. is bad, so therefore Russia must be good.”
You’re the one making it dichotomous. The only reason you think I’m saying Russia can do no wrong is because you believe they can do no right. So it seems odd to you that they can. And they have. They are defeating ISIS where the US couldn’t. Or wouldn’t. And They’re news media is better.

Some of the population of Crimea petitioned Russia. The Crimean Tartars didn’t, and look what’s already starting to happen to them.

This is ethnic conflict. There is nationalist foment on the part of both ethnic Ukrainians and ethnic Russians who wouldn’t even be in Crimea except for the past colonialist policies of failed empires.

And I see nothing about a “liberation”. I see liberation. You use quotes to deny that they did what they actually did do. The same kind of denial you use regarding Russia. They like Russia can do no right. You are as exceptional and as American as lynching.

Thus, a year after Obama and his European and Arab friends brought down Libya’s Gaddafi and shifted their proxy war of regime change to Syria, U.S. military intelligence saw clearly the imminent rise of ISIS — and that “this is exactly” what “the West, Gulf countries and Turkey…want, in order to isolate the Syrian regime.”

Yes, Obama created ISIS, with the enthusiastic assistance of Hillary Clinton, and he is still nurturing al Nusra, the erstwhile affiliate of al Qaida

You claimed that I believed Russia couldn’t do anything right. I gave you one example as proof that your belief about my sentiments was incorrect. You then moved the goalposts on me while simultaneously refusing to give similar proof that you don’t believe Russia is perfect. Just one fricking example, even from 70 years ago. You simply refuse.

So why should I? You’ll just find a reason to dismiss anything I say because apparently you need to continue thinking of me as a mindless brainwashed supporter of the Murican gummint.

Although you know what? This is quick and easy, so here’s example number two: Run up to the top of this thread, take a look at the very first comment, where I copied and pasted a long quote about nuclear disarmament.

One of the two world leaders in that article was trying to do a good thing, and one sounded like a deluded fool. Putin and Russia are being far more reasonable about extending the treaty and continuing to reduce the nuclear weapon stockpile than our current leader.

And I shouldn’t have had to spell that out for you, because it’s my first post on this thread. Right there this whole blankety-blank time.

@Solitaire
‘I shouldn’t have had to spell that out for you”
don’t know why you felt you needed to, I can read, I’m just not jumping thru your hoops. you feel you’ve got to make a list. go ahead. that’s your agenda. not mine.

“The Doomsday Clock (1947- ) marks how close the world is to self-destruction in the judgement of the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, with input from 15 Nobel Prize laureates.”

You got that blatantly wrong.
Amerika IS THE DOOMSDAY CLOCK!
There would probably be no such thing or thought of such a thing (as a doomsday clock) if not for how Amerika conducts it affairs (hegemony) throughout the world!

Rep. Tulsi Gabbard even told us that Syrians “expressed the question, why is it that the United States, its allies and other countries, are providing support, are providing arms, to terrorist groups like Al-Nusra, Al-Qaeda, ISIS, who are on the ground there, raping, kidnapping, torturing, and killing the Syrian people? Children, men, women and people of all ages.”

Well dam. I guess I was wrong. I thought the existence of the deep state was an uncontroversial issue. Got to stay off the alternative media. They are misinforming me. The New York Times says we don’t have a deep state in US. That’s something that only happens in other less savory countries. Like Egypt, Turkey and probably Russia. What appears to be deep state activity has only emerged with the Trump presidency, the intel community having no recourse but to resort to leaks to undermine him. But its not really a deep state. Even though most of what our government does is secret, i.e. classified. That’s not really deep state.

As Leaks Multiply, Fears of a ‘Deep State’ in America

WASHINGTON — A wave of leaks from government officials has hobbled the Trump administration, leading some to draw comparisons to countries like Egypt, Turkey and Pakistan, where shadowy networks within government bureaucracies, often referred to as “deep states,” undermine and coerce elected governments.So is the United States seeing the rise of its own deep state?
Not quite, experts say, but the echoes are real — and disturbing.
Though leaks can be a normal and healthy check on a president’s power, what’s happening now extends much further. The United States, those experts warn, risks developing an entrenched culture of conflict between the president and his own bureaucracy.

And you can believe the New York Times. They are not propaganda trying to disguise whats actually going on. And they are definitely not fake news.

The long hidden Deep state surfaces to meet the threat of Trump.
Both conservatives like Kristol and liberals state “publically, that the “deep state” should take out Trump. Both believe, without evidence, that the Russians intervened to try to get Trump elected. Therefore, both no doubt feel justified in openly espousing a coup d’etat. They match Trump’s blatancy with their own. Nothing deep about this.
Liberals and conservatives are now publically allied in demonizing Putin and Russia, and supporting a very dangerous military confrontation initiated by Obama and championed by the defeated Hillary Clinton. In the past these opposed political factions accepted that they would rotate their titular leaders into and out of the White House, and whenever the need arose to depose one or the other, that business would be left to deep state forces to effect in secret and everyone would play dumb.
Now the game has changed. It’s all “obvious.” The deep state has seemingly gone shallow.”

Obama, CIA groomed, was smoothly moved into power by the faction that felt Bush needed to be succeeded by a slick smiling assassin who symbolized “diversity,” could speak well, and played hoops. Hit them with the right hand; hit them with the left. Same coin: Take your pick – heads or tails. Hillary Clinton was expected to complete the trinity.

I used to think there was a deep state. but some mainstream sources are saying there isnt. And I know these sources are not propaganda or fake news. So it must be true. These sources could not all be under the influence of the CIA. That would be, like, wrong. You know. Brainwashing. ‘Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain’ kind of thing. ‘These are not the droids youre looking for’. Jedi mind tricks.

Last week the New Yorker, and yesterday Salon magazine, published editorials arguing against the very existence of an “American Deep State”. The arguments presented are very…interesting. Both are, perhaps, classic cases of protesting too much
………
So two…
…wait, did I say two? I meant three four five six seven. [links provided]Seven non-members of the non-deep state are so enraged by the idea that people might think the totally fake American deep state might be real, that they accidentally publish seemingly coordinated attacks on the very idea. Under very similar titles. All within the same few days. Citing the same “counter examples” of Egypt and Turkey. All acting with symmetrical umbrage.

I do like it when people get right to the crux of an issue, as Eric Zeusse does here. Here’s the problem in a nut shell; beginning with the Obama lie that was then enshrined in MSM and implanted into the American mind. That’s how propaganda and social control works and how they funnel us down the path to war.

SUMMARY

If the March 2014 annexation of Crimea by Russia was based upon the overwhelming desire by Crimeans that Crimea become again a part of Russia such as Crimea had been until 1954, instead of upon Russia’s ‘conquest’ of Crimea such as Obama has charged, then the economic sanctions that Obama placed against Russia on the basis of that annexation is on false ground, and has no authentic justification in law or in fact. Also, in that case, NATO’s subsequent military buildup against Russia, purportedly to protect NATO against ‘another such conquest by Russia’, would be based upon this same lie: the lie that Crimea’s becoming again a part of Russia was something other than a legitimate carrying-out of any people’s sovereign right, of self-determination of peoples — a right that the West recognizes for Catalonians in Spain, and for Scotch in UK, but not for Crimeans in Ukraine. Consequently, essential to addressing this crucial matter is forthrightly to address misrepresentations that are commonly asserted regarding it, and also to address in a credible way what the motivations might be for any such commonly asserted misrepresentations of this historically crucial matter. In other words: an unusually frank discussion is necessary here, which does not mince words where outright lies have been stated and become widespread in The West, and which instead presents the facts that stand forth the most clearly upon the basis of the evidence that is of the very highest reliability and credibility concerning each respective point in question in the matter. The most reliable evidence is presented here, and is consistently in favor of the Russian position, and against The West’s (the U.S. and its allies) position, on this crucial, even mega-historical, issue.

No. Nobody nor nothing is controlling everything you do. Just your thoughts about geopolitical realities. To the degree that you passively accept the programming. And while somewhere along the line Bilderbergs and lizard people may play a roll, your outlook on the world is primarily being controlled by the CIA and MSM. That’s why you believe that Russia hacked the election, installed Trump, and invaded Ukraine. You believe what the state tells you to believe. Its 1984. How many fingers am I holding up?

@abagond
Nothing in particular. Just various interesting articles. Washingtons Blog does a good job covering the subject. Here’s an interesting MSM piece.

Mr. Giraldi, executive director of the Council for the National Interest, a foreign-policy advocacy group in Washington, called the American deep state of today an “unelected, unappointed, and unaccountable presence within the system that actually manages what is taking place behind the scenes.”

I recently heard a podcast on Project Censored that went in depth on the subject of the Deep State. The show hosts were joined by Peter Dale Scott and David Talbot.

Peter Dale Scott is a retired Canadian diplomat, professor, and a prolific author on politics and history. His books include Deep Politics and the Death of JFK, Drugs, Oil and War, and The American Deep State.

David Talbot is the founder of Salon.com, and now writes for the San Francisco Chronicle. His most recent book is The Devil’s Chessboard: Allen Dulles, the CIA, and the Rise of America’s Secret Government.

In little under an hour they briefly give a history of the Deep State, define the sectors of the Deep State and discuss how factions of the Deep State are working against other factions to control the US and global economies.

They also discuss how groups as disparate as scientists, seniors and BLM are all facing the same adversaries and how they could mobilize and build effective coalitions to fight various right wing factions.

your outlook on the world is primarily being controlled by the CIA and MSM. That’s why you believe that Russia hacked the election, installed Trump, and invaded Ukraine. You believe what the state tells you to believe. Its 1984. How many fingers am I holding up?

bunch of good info in this article. Rupert Murdoch, Fox News mogul, part of CIA media control? part of deep state?

Another figure in Raymond’s constellation of propaganda assets was media mogul Rupert Murdoch, who was viewed as both a key political ally of President Reagan and a valuable source of funding for private groups that were coordinating with White House propaganda operations. [See Consortiumnews.com’s “Rupert Murdoch: Propaganda Recruit.”]

Aint it funny? The Ministry of Truth, as I call this perception management bureaucracy, begins around 1984. How appropriate.

The more recently released documents – declassified between 2013 and 2017 – show how these earlier Casey-Raymond efforts merged with the creation of a formal psyop bureaucracy in 1986 also under the control of Raymond’s NSC operation. The combination of the propaganda and psyop programs underscored the powerful capability that the U.S. government developed more than three decades ago for planting slanted, distorted or fake news. (Casey died in 1987; Raymond died in 2003.)

Over those several decades, even as the White House changed hands from Republicans to Democrats to Republicans to Democrats, the momentum created by William Casey and Walter Raymond continued to push these “perception management/psyops” strategies forward. In more recent years, the wording has changed, giving way to more pleasing euphemisms, like “smart power” and “strategic communications.” But the idea is still the same: how you can use propaganda to sell U.S. government policies abroad and at home.

Something else “our” government and its media whores did not tell us is that under the Crimean Constitution of 1992, Crimea existed as a legal, democratic, secular state. Crimea’s relationship with Ukraine was based on bilateral agreements. In 1995 Ukrainian special ops forces and Ukrainian Army troops invaded Crimea and annexed the territory.
Here is the report from Arina Tsukanova: http://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2017/03/28/so-who-annexed-crimea-peninsular-then.html
The Autonomous Republic of Crimea was established by the 1991 All-Union Referendum in which 94% of Crimeans voted in favor of re-establishing their status as an autonomous republic. Crimeans repeated the vote in 2014 by an even higher percentage, and this time prevented another Ukrainian invasion by reuniting with Russia.Why didn’t you know this? [’cause MSMs job is to hide it] Why instead do you hear nothing but lies about a “Russian invasion and annexation of Crimea”?

lol. did I say ‘crisis’? the first article I read today talks about ‘crisis’. I seem to be right on target.

By Bill Binney and Ray McGovern.

Binney is the NSA executive who created the agency’s mass surveillance program for digital information, who served as the senior technical director within the agency, who managed six thousand NSA employees, the 36-year NSA veteran widely regarded as a “legend” within the agency …

McGovern is a 27-year CIA veteran, who chaired National Intelligence Estimates and personally delivered intelligence briefings to Presidents Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush, their Vice Presidents, Secretaries of State, the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and many other senior government officials.

Although many details are still hazy because of secrecy – and further befogged by politics – it appears House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes was informed last week about invasive electronic surveillance of senior U.S. government officials and, in turn, passed that information onto President Trump.

This news presents Trump with an unwelcome but unavoidable choice: confront those who have kept him in the dark about such rogue activities or live fearfully in their shadow. (The latter was the path chosen by President Obama. Will Trump choose the road less traveled?)

What President Trump decides will largely determine the freedom of action he enjoys as president on many key security and other issues. But even more so, his choice may decide whether there is a future for this constitutional republic. Either he can acquiesce to or fight against a Deep State of intelligence officials who have a myriad of ways to spy on politicians (and other citizens) and thus amass derogatory material that can be easily transformed into blackmail.

This crisis (yes, “crisis” is an overused word, but in this highly unusual set of circumstances we believe it is appropriate) came to light mostly by accident after President Trump tweeted on March 4 that his team in New York City’s Trump Towers had been “wiretapped” by President Obama.